Getachew Reda: The Betrayer of Tigray and Architect of Deception

In the annals of treachery, few names in Tigrayan history will be remembered with as much disdain as Getachew Reda. Once a vocal figure in the struggle for Tigray’s survival, he has now reduced himself to a mere pawn in Abiy Ahmed’s grand deception—an actor in a political theater orchestrated to dismantle the resistance and hand over Tigray’s fate to its oppressors.

After completing his mission of betrayal, Getachew Reda fled to Addis Ababa, where he issued media briefings, gathering the very same TV channels that once cheered on the genocidal war against Tigray. His press statements were nothing more than an insult to the suffering of the people—a desperate attempt to justify the dismantling of the struggle and the normalization of Tigray’s subjugation. The man who once spoke of resistance and dignity now speaks the language of appeasement, acting as a mouthpiece for a regime that massacred his own people.

It is no surprise that the people of Tigray have rechristened him "ጌጋቸው ባንዳቸው" (Falsehood Proxy of Betrayal). His role in the so-called "Interim Administration" was never about rebuilding Tigray; it was about ensuring that the real voices of resistance were silenced. Instead of demanding justice for the atrocities committed against his own people, he chose to collaborate with those responsible, facilitating their agenda rather than opposing it.

The African Union’s latest statement, calling for adherence to the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement (COHA), is yet another reminder of the sham diplomacy surrounding Tigray’s plight. The AU has remained silent in the face of genocide, only surfacing to ensure that the so-called "peace" serves the interests of Addis Ababa and foreign stakeholders rather than the victims of war. By urging compliance with the Pretoria Agreement without addressing the ongoing suffering of the Tigrayan people, the AU further legitimizes the very forces that waged war on civilians.

If peace were truly the goal, Getachew Reda and his handlers in Addis Ababa would have fought for justice, accountability, and real self-determination for Tigray. Instead, they have weaponized the language of reconciliation to suppress dissent and erase the memory of the struggle.

History will not be kind to Getachew Reda. His name will be remembered not as a leader, but as a cautionary tale—a man who traded the blood of his own people for temporary comfort in the arms of their oppressors. But no amount of betrayal can erase the truth: Tigray’s resilience cannot be broken by one man’s treachery. The struggle for justice and dignity continues, with or without those who have chosen to stand on the wrong side of history.